Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix Opened offline attachment directed to conversation page on online #49832

Conversation

wildan-m
Copy link
Contributor

@wildan-m wildan-m commented Sep 27, 2024

Details

Fix offline attachment opening directly to online conversation page. New dismissal behavior confirmed here: #48173 (comment)

Fixed Issues

$ #48173
PROPOSAL: #48173 (comment) (Alternative 3)

Tests

  1. Login
  2. Open a chat
  3. Go offline
  4. Upload an image
  5. Open the image
  6. Go online
  7. Verify that image preview modal not dismissed
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Note

There is a known issue in the native platform where the attachment index incorrectly switches even after setting it correctly #49832 (comment). This is a known upstream issue that should be addressed separately #49832 (comment).

Offline tests

Same as test

QA Steps

Same as test

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
    • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
    • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
    • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
  • I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
    • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
Kapture.2024-09-27.at.14.02.17.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
Kapture.2024-09-27.at.14.05.10.mp4
iOS: Native
Kapture.2024-09-27.at.11.02.28.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
Kapture.2024-09-27.at.13.31.57.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Kapture.2024-09-27.at.10.41.52.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
Kapture.2024-09-27.at.14.06.18.mp4

@wildan-m wildan-m requested a review from a team as a code owner September 27, 2024 07:14
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from s77rt and removed request for a team September 27, 2024 07:14
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Sep 27, 2024

@s77rt Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

Copy link
Contributor

@s77rt s77rt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+Run prettier

let initialPage = targetAttachments.findIndex(compareImage);
const prevInitialPage = attachments.findIndex(compareImage);

// If no matching attachment is found in targetAttachments but found in attachments, update initialPage
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This comment is explaining the what not the why. Let's remove it

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

done


// Dismiss the modal when deleting an attachment during its display in preview.
if (initialPage === -1 && attachments.find(compareImage)) {
// If no matching attachment with the same index, dismiss the modal
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same ^

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

done

Comment on lines 92 to 93
let initialPage = targetAttachments.findIndex(compareImage);
const prevInitialPage = attachments.findIndex(compareImage);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
let initialPage = targetAttachments.findIndex(compareImage);
const prevInitialPage = attachments.findIndex(compareImage);
let attachmentIndex = targetAttachments.findIndex(compareImage);
const prevAttachmentIndex = attachments.findIndex(compareImage);

I feel that this naming is more correct. findIndex returns an index and not a page. The index is used as the page id.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

done

const prevInitialPage = attachments.findIndex(compareImage);

// If no matching attachment is found in targetAttachments but found in attachments, update initialPage
if (initialPage === -1 && prevInitialPage !== -1 && targetAttachments[prevInitialPage]) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we avoid comparing with -1 and instead just access the attachment array directly

if (!targetAttachments[attachmentIndex] && targetAttachments[prevAttachmentIndex])

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

done

Comment on lines 43 to 44
let attachmentIndex = targetAttachments.findIndex(compareImage);
const prevAttachmentIndex = attachments.findIndex(compareImage);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

NAB. Another naming clarity. targetAttachments is confusing.

  • targetAttachments -> newAttachments
  • attachmentIndex -> newIndex
  • prevAttachmentIndex -> index

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

done

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented Sep 29, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

  • I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
  • I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
    • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
    • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
    • I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
  • I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
    • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
android.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
mweb-chrome.mov
iOS: Native
ios.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
mweb-safari.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web.mov
MacOS: Desktop
desktop.mov

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented Sep 29, 2024

@wildan-m Can you check why on native the attachment changes after getting online?

ios.mov
android.mov

…x/48173-dismiss-when-no-attachment-with-same-page-index
@wildan-m
Copy link
Contributor Author

Can you check why on native the attachment changes after getting online?

that's pretty weird.

@s77rt do you know how to make metro keep logging the log after re-connect?

@wildan-m
Copy link
Contributor Author

wildan-m commented Oct 1, 2024

@s77rt I've created this simple reproduction step, even without scrolling from reanimated, the pager view itself can't properly work if we replace the pager items without re-mounting.

Kapture.2024-10-01.at.10.31.56.mp4

I think we don't need to report the issue as there are similar issues open.
callstack/react-native-pager-view#597
callstack/react-native-pager-view#791

Minimum reproducible code
import React from 'react';
import { useState } from 'react';
import { Button, SafeAreaView, Text, View, StyleSheet } from 'react-native';
import PagerView from 'react-native-pager-view';

const ids = ['1', '2', '3'];

function getNewArray() {
  const newArray = [...ids];
  newArray[2] = Math.random().toString(36).substring(7); // Generate a random string
  return newArray;
}
export const BasicPagerViewExample = () => {

  const [pagesContent, setPagesContent] = useState<string[]>(getNewArray());
  const [page, setPage] = useState<number>(2);

  console.log(pagesContent);

  return (
    <SafeAreaView style={{ flex: 1 }}>
      <Text style={{ textAlign: 'center' }}>{pagesContent.length}</Text>
      <PagerView orientation="horizontal" style={{ flex: 1, backgroundColor: 'yellow' }} initialPage={page}
        onPageSelected={(e) => {
          console.log('onPageSelected ~ e.nativeEvent.position:', e.nativeEvent.position);
        }}
      >
        {pagesContent.map((content) => (
          <View key={content} style={{ flex: 1,backgroundColor: 'green' }}>
            <View style={{ flex: 1, justifyContent: 'center', alignItems: 'center' , backgroundColor:'red'}}>
              <Text style={{ fontSize: 30 }}>{content}</Text>
            </View>
          </View>
        ))}
      </PagerView>
      <Button
        title={'Replace third page content'}
        onPress={() => {
          setPagesContent(getNewArray());
          setPage(2);
        }}
      />
    </SafeAreaView>
  );
};

export default BasicPagerViewExample

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented Oct 1, 2024

@wildan-m In main if we follow the same steps in native, the attachment will get dismissed, but now it will change to another one? Is that correct? If so I think we should fix the other bug separately since it's not a true regression (the flow is already broken on main)

@wildan-m
Copy link
Contributor Author

wildan-m commented Oct 1, 2024

In main if we follow the same steps in native, the attachment will get dismissed, but now it will change to another one? Is that correct?

correct

I think we should fix the other bug separately since it's not a true regression (the flow is already broken on main)

@s77rt that's ok, another option is to temporarily implement the component's key solution until upstream fix resolved. I believe the upstream issue is not a simple fix since many people experience it and the mentioned similar issues is open for a long time.

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented Oct 1, 2024

@wildan-m We should not go with workarounds. Fixing this upstream should be the way to go. For now can yoo please revert the recent changed and fix conflicts?

@wildan-m
Copy link
Contributor Author

wildan-m commented Oct 2, 2024

Can we avoid comparing with -1 and instead just access the attachment array directly

@s77rt I think we can't avoid comparing to -1 after this new eslint rule applied, access array using at(-1) will get the last array item

const index = attachments.findIndex(compareImage);

// If no matching attachment with the same index, dismiss the modal
if (newIndex === -1 && newAttachments.at(index)) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We need to check if index is not -1 too otherwise newAttachments.at(index) may be truthy (please fix same in other places)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

done

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from rlinoz October 2, 2024 18:21
Copy link
Contributor

@rlinoz rlinoz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is looking good, I just have a couple of questions

Copy link
Contributor

@rlinoz rlinoz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Works well, thanks!

@rlinoz rlinoz merged commit 90fc8fb into Expensify:main Oct 3, 2024
19 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Oct 3, 2024

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 4, 2024

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/rlinoz in version: 9.0.45-1 🚀

platform result
🤖 android 🤖 cancelled 🔪
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 7, 2024

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 9.0.45-4 🚀

platform result
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants